Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.

Notices

Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.

You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!

Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.

Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.

Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide

This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.

moaimullet, you could have just buy a hardware controller to make it very, very easy for yourself. Probably there are some files on the NTFS partition that are corrupt. Lucky for you they were not system based and they did not have obscured permissions. RAID 5 needs a lot of processor resources for I/O transactions. However, you may have even higher chance of data corruption or data loss, so I suggest backing up your data.

I would not do it your way because the reliability and stability have to go both ways for good operation. I know Linux is reliable and stable, but Windows is never reliable and stable. I rather pick being in debt for several months after buying a hardware RAID controller like from 3ware instead of doing it your way.

Note:
Using SCSI or SATA hard drives in a software RAID can change from one device node and to the next node. You may have to set the ID or use software labels to make it predictable upon boot up.

BTW, I have not yet setup RAID, but I studied the documentation at every angle.

Hi Electro.. Yeah, it was a complete stab in the dark with this one. What made me take the jump was the fact that, should my costly hardware RAID controller die, I'd have to get a perfectly compatible replacement (e.g. the exact same model) or else lose everything. If the original RAID lasted a couple of years, that could get seriously expensive. That is way too much faith in hardware for me. So I did this knowing I had some free time ahead that could be spent reconfiguring if need be.

That said, so far so good. Haven't run into any NTFS corruption or permission problems to date. But you're dead on with the Linux vs Windows reliability: my biggest problem is that when XP randomly reboots, which it likes to do every couple of weeks without any warning or useful debug info, it does a rebuild on all volumes at once. Since they are all on the same physical disks, this does create some grindage, and can last around 7 hours. My solution is to reboot manually every week or so.. using Firefox it's hardly a problem to get back to where I was (reboot without closing any of its windows , but having to remember is a pain sometimes..

Anyway, that is better left for a different thread. What is more relevant is that the CPU usage doesn't stray above 10%, even when rebuilding.. and I'm using an AMD 3500, hardly top of the line today. It's really negligible considering how much processor is on the market now. It might become an issue after Moore's Law does battle with the periodic table (and loses), but for now I'm happy..

At this point, since the array is clean, it's no longer an array problem, I guess. It's a filesystem problem. It doesn't look like you have much choice other than to run "e2fsck -y /dev/md0" and have it repair the filesystem for you. I can't imagine why you wanted to run -S.